Portfolio Agreement with IHS Markit

Continued Portfolio Management through exchange of Agribusiness Portfolio for further scale and capability in Informa Tech.

London: Informa (LSE: INF.L), the International Exhibitions, Events, Information Services and Scholarly Publishing Group, today announces further Progressive Portfolio Management (“PPM”) through an agreement with information services group, IHS Markit, that sees Informa’s Agribusiness Intelligence Portfolio exchanged for IHS Markit’s leading portfolio of TMT brands, further enhancing Informa Tech.

“This agreement is very positive for both IHS Markit and Informa, increasing the focus of each company on core markets where it has particular strengths and a long-term commitment to invest and grow” said Lance Uggla, CEO IHS Markit and Stephen A. Carter, Group Chief Executive, Informa PLC.

The agreement forms part of Informa’s PPM programme designed to focus the Group on brands and customer markets with the greatest opportunities for growth and expansion. It significantly strengthens Informa’s market position in Telecoms Media & Technology, whilst providing an attractive new home for the Group’s specialist information brands within the Agribusiness Intelligence Portfolio, with an owner committed to investing and expanding in this market over the long-term.

The expansion of Informa Tech includes a portfolio of B2B brands providing specialist research and data to customers through a range of subscription products and consulting. It extends and enhances Informa’s international reach through its strong presence in Asia and North America, and further strengthens its position in key sub-sectors of the TMT market, most notably in Information Technology, Communications Technology, Security Technology and Emerging Transformational Technology.

The enlarged Informa Tech will have annual revenues of around $350m and offer a wide range of B2B services, making it an attractive international partner for informing, educating and connecting Technology businesses and professionals.

Stephen A. Carter, Group Chief Executive, Informa PLC, said: “At Informa, we are focused on improving our depth and specialisation around attractive customer markets. Our ambitions for Informa Tech will be further enhanced by the addition of IHS Markit’s TMT portfolio, extending our customer and international reach, creating a strong platform for future growth.”

Lance Uggla, CEO, IHS Markit, said: “The Informa Agribusiness Intelligence portfolio is a clear extension of our Chemical and Downstream businesses and builds our existing data, pricing, insights, forecasting and news services within our Resources segment. Agriculture is the largest end chemical market in the world and this transaction expands our capabilities into fertilizers and chemical crop protection while substantively expanding our capabilities in biofuels.”

Transaction Details

The portfolio agreement is structured as two separate transactions that value the two businesses at equivalent EBITDA multiples, with Informa contributing an additional $30m in cash to IHS Markit to reflect the larger EBITDA contribution from the IHS Markit business. The transactions are expected to close in July 2019 and are subject to customary closing conditions, including US regulatory approval.

Huawei CEO pressures US President Trump via Chinese media

Ren Zhengfei, Founder and CEO of besieged telecoms vendor Huawei, chose sympathetic Chinese media for his latest publicity initiative.

He invited the People’s Daily, CCTV and Xinhua News Agency, which are directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, as well as a bunch of other media not known for challenging the party line, for a bit of a chat at Huawei towers in Shenzhen. Conspicuously absent was the relatively neutral and objective South China Morning Post.

While the choice of media ensured a sympathetic line of questioning, Ren (pictured, photo taken from report) still served up some interesting answers. The current line from Huawei, in response to all the aggro it’s having to deal with from the US, seems to be to be as friendly as possible towards US companies, while at the same time demonising US politicians.

“What the US will do is out of our control,” said Ren. “I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the US companies that we work with. Over these 30 years, they have helped us to grow into what we are today. They have made many contributions to us. As you know, most of the companies that provide consulting services to Huawei are based in the US, including dozens of companies like IBM and Accenture.

“Second, we also have been receiving support from a large number of US component and part manufacturers over all these years. In the face of the recent crisis, I can feel these companies’ sense of justice and sympathy towards us.

“The US is a country ruled by law. US companies must abide by the laws, and so must the real economy. So you guys from the media should not always blame US companies. Instead, you should speak for them. The blame should rest with some US politicians.

“US politicians might have underestimated our strengths. I don’t want to say too much about this, because Ms. He Tingbo, President of HiSilicon, made all these issues very clear in her letter to employees. And all mainstream newspapers inside and outside of China have reported on this letter.”

Everything Ren said was accurate, but it’s intriguing that he made such a point of exonerating US companies from complicity in this whole affair. Huawei is, of course, a fully globalised company and relies heavily on good relationships with companies everywhere, so it makes sense to protect those relationships.

But looking under the surface of those comments two things spring to mind. Firstly it’s tactically sound to try to drive as much of a wedge as possible between the US private and public sectors. Presumably US companies like Google aren’t happy at being forced to stop doing business with one of the world’s largest technology companies and will be pressuring the US government to wind its neck in behind the scenes. They could yet be vital allies in Huawei’s bid to resolve this situation.

Secondly Ren seems to have scored a bit of an own-goal by conceding how powerless companies are to resist the will of politicians in their home countries. Since the central accusation levelled at Huawei by the US is that it is compelled to assist the Chinese state in espionage activities when asked, a call for private sector defiance may have been more cunning.

There was more talk of component autonomy but the Arm situation, which could scupper many of those plans, wasn’t directly addressed. Apparently Huawei was nearly sold to a US company in 2000 but it fell through at the last minute and they decided against trying to sell it to anyone else. Ren said Huawei has been preparing to ‘square off against the US’ ever since. The core message is that Huawei is fully prepared for this situation and will handle it just fine, but the Android situation was also conveniently avoided.

In response to a question about how long this current situation will last Ren replied “You are asking the wrong person; you should ask President Trump this question. I think there are two sides to this. Of course, we will be affected, but it will also inspire China to develop its electronics industry in a systematic and pragmatic manner.”

Hilariously the piece concludes with the statement “Huawei contributed to this story,” implying some degree of editorial veto. Nonetheless it’s worth reading the whole thing for the considerable insight it offers into the thinking behind the company. Huawei seems to have used this benign media gathering as an opportunity to put pressure on US politicians, or at least encourage US companies to do so. While this is a sound tactic there is currently little evidence of any progress being made in the geopolitical spat that Huawei has found itself in the middle of.

Qualcomm’s share price nosedives after FTC antirust loss

Qualcomm might have some of the most battle-hardened legal experts in the technology world, but it can’t win every fight.

In a ruling coming out of the District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Lucy Koh has ruled the chipset giant had violated the Federal Trade Commission Act. The judgment could have a significant impact on the Qualcomm business model, with Judge Koh suggesting it used its dominant position to impose excessive licensing fees.

While this certainly won’t be the end of Qualcomm dominance in the chipset market, the firm houses too much competence and smarts, it might have a drastic impact on the spreadsheets. And investors seem to be fearing the worst also, with Qualcomm’s share price declining almost 12% in pre-market trading at the time of writing.

“Qualcomm’s licensing practices have strangled competition in the CDMA and the premium LTE modem chip markets for years, and harmed rivals, OEMs, and end consumers in the process,” Judge Koh said in the ruling.

In a filing made in 2017, the Federal Trade Commission argued Qualcomm was employing anticompetitive tactics, using its dominant position in certain segments of the semiconductor market to hamper competition and effectively hold customers to random. The FTC suggested some components licenced by Qualcomm were standard essential parts, meaning they would have to be licenced on ‘fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms’. In short, Qualcomm should not have been charging such a handsome premium on the licences.

The FTC also claimed it was not reasonable for Qualcomm to enter into an exclusive agreement for some components with Apple, shutting other smartphone manufacturers out of the equation.

The Qualcomm business model has been under fire for some time, with the business facing numerous legal challenges in different markets worldwide. Although this is only a single ruling, it remains to be seen whether this sets a precedent and a subsequent domino effect around the world. Qualcomm is on the ropes here, though it will be interesting to see how the firm reacts to this latest antitrust blow.

US suspends Huawei export ban for three months to help operators adapt

The US Department of Commerce has given Huawei a three month license to buy US goods in order to lessen the disruption to US companies.

The decision follows the news that a bunch of US companies, including Google, were going to stop doing business with Huawei. Not only would this do severe damage to the desirability of Huawei Android smartphones sold outside of China, but would have caused major disruption to any US companies that rely on working with Huawei.

The DoC therefore decided to grant a temporary licence allowing Huawei and US companies to buy stuff from each other for 90 days starting 20 May. Any US operator that use Huawei gear now effectively have three months to swap it out for equipment not made by anyone on the US shitlist. Any still flogging Huawei smartphones might want to take that time to return them to their source too.

“The Temporary General License grants operators time to make other arrangements and the Department space to determine the appropriate long term measures for Americans and foreign telecommunications providers that currently rely on Huawei equipment for critical services,” said Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. “In short, this license will allow operations to continue for existing Huawei mobile phone users and rural broadband networks.”

Huawei responded with its now familiar defiance, telling Chinese media that none of this is remotely surprising and that it doesn’t even need the temporary license because it saw all this stuff coming ages ago. Additionally a UK Huawei exec told the beeb he reckons Huawei is just collateral damage in the broader trade war between the US and China, which is hard to argue with.

If you’re really into that sort of thing you can read the full temporary license decision here. This doesn’t seem to represent any softening of the US position, just an attempt to cushion the blow for US companies and consumers. It may, however, also represent a diplomatic window for US and China to try to resolve their differences and prevent the ban kicking in on 19 August. Time will tell but further escalation seems more likely than a truce at this point.

US supply ban threatens to cripple Huawei’s global business

Another day, another escalation as Google heads a stampede of US companies apparently refusing to do business with Huawei.

As escalations go, however, this is a pretty big one. Reuters was the first report that Google has suspended some business with Huawei in response to the company being put on the US ‘entity list’, which means US companies need explicit permission from the US state before they’re allowed to sell anything to them. It seems that permission has been denied.

For Google this means denying access to those bits of Android Google licenses – mainly the Play Store and Google’s own mobile products such as the Gmail and Maps apps. Huawei can still access the core Android operating system as that has an open source license but, as companies such as Amazon have discovered, that’s pretty useless without all the other Google goodies.

We recently wrote that Huawei’s addition to the entity list is the most significant consequence of Trump’s executive order and here we have an immediate illustration of that. It looks like pretty much all other US companies are also rushing to comply with the new regulations, with Bloomberg reporting that Qualcomm and Intel are among others cutting of business with Huawei and others will presumably follow. Nikkei even reckons German chip-maker Infineon has joined the stampede.

Huawei already has an extensive chip-making operation of its own, so arguably it can cope without the likes of Qualcomm, but what about the millions of other bits and bobs that get crammed into a smartphone such as screens, cameras, memory, sensors, etc? A lot of these could be supplied by non-US companies like Samsung and, of course, Chinese ones, but there must surely be some areas in which Huawei is entirely reliant on the US supply chain.

But Google’s licensed mobile products and services are unique. An Android phone that doesn’t provide access to the Play store is massively diminished in its utility to the end user and Google Maps is the market leader. Google also has a near monopoly with YouTube and millions of people are reliant on things like Gmail, Google Pay, Play Movies. When there are so many great alternative Android smartphone vendors, why would anyone now buy a de-featured Huawei one?

In response to these reports Android moved to stress that it will continue to support existing Huawei Android phones in the following tweet.

Meanwhile Huawei issued the following statement. “Huawei has made substantial contributions to the development and growth of Android around the world. As one of Android’s key global partners, we have worked closely with their open-source platform to develop an ecosystem that has benefitted both users and the industry.

“Huawei will continue to provide security updates and after sales services to all existing Huawei and Honor smartphone and tablet products covering those have been sold or still in stock globally. We will continue to build a safe and sustainable software ecosystem, in order to provide the best experience for all users globally.”

Huawei has reportedly been working on its own smartphone OS in anticipation of this sort of thing happening but, as Microsoft, Samsung and others have found, there seems to be little public appetite for alternative to Android and iOS. Huawei may be able to sell a proprietary platform in China, where the Play Store is restricted anyway, but internationally this move will surely see Huawei smartphone sales fall off a cliff.

“If the US ban is permanent, we predict Huawei’s global smartphone shipments will tumble -25% in 2019,” Neil Mawston of Strategy Analytics told Telecoms.com. “If Huawei cannot offer Android’s wildly popular apps, like Maps or Gmail, Huawei’s smartphone demand outside China will collapse.

“If the US ban is temporary, and lifted within weeks, Huawei’s global smartphone growth will return to positive growth fairly swiftly. Huawei offers good smartphone models at decent prices through an extensive retail network, and it should recover reasonably well if it is allowed to compete.”

“We still don’t have a clear understanding of what Google has told Huawei and what elements of the Android operating system may be restricted, so it remains unclear what the ramifications will be,” said Ben Wood of CCS Insight. “However, any disruption in getting updates to the software or the associated applications would have considerable implications for Huawei’s consumer device business.”

There have been very few official statements on the matter from US companies, so Wood is right to tread carefully at this stage, but it’s hard to see this news as anything other than catastrophic for Huawei. Its consumer business, which is the most successful unit in the company, relies largely on Android to run its products and will surely be severely diminished by the Google move.

And there’s no reason to assume the damage will be contained there. Last year Huawei’s contemporary ZTE was almost driven out of business by a ban on US companies doing business with it. Huawei may have hedged its position regarding networking components suppliers more effectively than ZTE but it will presumably suffer greatly once those companies follow suit.

Huawei is one of the biggest companies in the world and has become so in spite of being largely excluded from the US market. The Chinese state will do everything it can to support Huawei, but at least some of its US suppliers offer unique products. At the very least this puts Huawei in a weak negotiating position with potential replacement partners and international customers, but the implications of this latest development are potentially existential.

New BT logo looks more like a warning than an invitation

British Telecom has filed for a trademark on a new logo but it’s a bit rubbish and the internet is ridiculing it.

Whichever brand consultancy BT has hired, presumably at great expense, to refresh its logo presumably either couldn’t be bothered to think about it properly or was given bad advice by its client. The result is simply the letters ‘BT’ with a circle around them. Black letters, black circle, white background, that’s it. Even the font is boring.

The Guardian was one of the first to cover the filing and marketing mag Campaign pointed out that its seems to be an even more stark and boring version of a rebrand it was planning three years ago, but wisely put on the back burner. At least that one had some colour in it. Unsurprisingly the internet has been quick to mock this feeble effort, with a great piece of opportunistic guerilla marketing from Poundland our current favourite.

“We’ve shared our new logo with our colleagues today and will consult them on the detail as we gradually roll it out towards the end of the summer,” a BT spokesperson told the Guardian. “Our CEO has been very clear that the new mark symbolises real change. Making every BT employee a shareholder in the company is the first step towards transforming BT into a national champion that exceeds our customers’ expectations.”

While it’s understandable that new CEO Jansen would want to spray his scent on his new company we think he can afford to take a bit longer over such a momentous decision. Right now it looks at best like a functional street sign designed to warn the unsuspecting punter about BT rather than endear it to them. Not all change is good, Phil, and you might want to give the whole thing a rethink on your summer holidays.

The real branding challenge faced by BT is how to incorporate, if at all, EE. Its brand currently goes heavy on the letters-in-a-circle theme, albeit with a bit more creative flair, so maybe BT is trying for a bit of geometric alignment or something. But as we move into the 5G era, Britain’s biggest telco should think twice before rebranding itself to look like a speed limit sign.

Vodafone ditches Kiwis and cuts dividend in search of ‘financial headroom’

Vodafone has announced the sale of its New Zealand arm and a cut to the dividend as the firm searches for breathing room on the spreadsheets amid its Liberty Global acquisition and annual loss.

Such is the precarious position Vodafone is under, a cut to the dividend was expected by many analysts, though the sale of its Kiwi business unit compounds the misery. Facing various challenges around the world, including expensive spectrum auctions in Europe, the telco giant is searching for financial relief, though whether these moves prove to be adequate remains to be seen.

“We are executing our strategy at pace and have achieved our guidance for the year, with good growth in most markets but also increased competition in Spain and Italy and headwinds in South Africa,” said Group CEO Nick Read. “These challenges weighed on our service revenue growth during the year, and together with high spectrum auction costs have reduced our financial headroom.

“The Group is at a key point of transformation – deepening customer engagement, accelerating digital transformation, radically simplifying our operations, generating better returns from our infrastructure assets and continuing to optimise our portfolio. To support these goals and to rebuild headroom, the Board has made the decision to rebase the dividend, helping us to reduce debt and deliver to the low end of our target range in the next few years.”

While the news of a dividend cut saw share price drop by more than 5%, trading prior to markets opening has seen a slight recovery (at the time of writing). The dividend cut is not as drastic as some had forecast, down to 9 euro cents from 15, while an additional €2.1 billion from the New Zealand sale will provide some relief.

Looking at the financials for the year ending March 31, group revenues declined by 6.2% to €43.666 billion, while the operating loss stood at a weighty €7.644 billion. This compares to a profit of €2.788 billion across the previous year, though there are several different factors to take into consideration such as the merger with Idea Cellular in India and a change in accounting standards.

The loss might shock some for the moment, though this is likely to balance out in the long-run. In changing from the IAS18 accounting standard to IFRS15, Vodafone is altering how it is realising revenue on the spreadsheets. From here on forward, revenues are only reported as each stage of the contract is completed. It might be a shock for the moment, but more revenue is there to be realised in the future.

Although these numbers are the not the most positive, there is a hope on the horizon.

“The dividend cut is a massive blow for investors, while the results highlight the on-going challenges facing the company in its quest to turnaround its fortunes,” said Paolo Pescatore of analyst firm PP Foresight. “All hopes seem to be pinned on 5G, but the business model is unproven. Huge investment is required to roll out these new ultra-fast networks, but it comes at a cost.”

On the 5G front, Vodafone UK has announced it will go live on July 3, initially launching in seven cities, with an additional 12 live by the end of the year. Vodafone will also offer 5G roaming in the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain over the summer period. Interestingly enough, the firm has said it will price 5G at the levels as 4G.

Although this is a minor consolation set against the backdrop of a monstrous loss, it is at least something to hold onto. As it stands, Vodafone is winning the 5G race in the UK, while the roaming claim is another which gives the firm something to shout about. Vodafone is not in a terrible position, though many will be wary of the daunting spectrum auctions it faces over the coming months.

Vodafone share price tumbles on dividend cut report

Share price in Vodafone has taken a 4.3% hit during the opening hours of trading as rumours over a cut in dividend emerge.

Although several telcos have veered away from the dangers of cutting a dividend, The Sunday Times is reporting Vodafone is on the verge of making the announcement. With fourth quarter results scheduled for tomorrow morning, the team only has a short period of time to fend off unwanted questions.

Vodafone is currently one of the most attractive investments in the FTSE thanks to higher than average dividend payments to investors, though that might all be about to change. Some analyst firms are suggesting the cut could be as large as 50%, taking the dividend down from 15 pence per share to 7.5 pence. At the time of writing, Vodafone’s share price had declined 4.53% from the closing price on Friday afternoon.

The Vodafone share price has been steadily declining over the last 12-18 months, though any more downward movement could take it to the lowest since the fallout of the financial crisis in 2008.

The cause of the dividend cut is most likely to be due to the demands of 5G deployments across Europe. Although Vodafone is in a very strong position in multiple markets across the continent, this creates a difficult position when it comes to funding the funds to fuel future-proof infrastructure investments.

The challenge which Vodafone is specifically facing is spectrum. With auctions in Italy and Germany set to push the price of spectrum further north, telcos in the markets will be scrapping and scraping to secure a war chest deep enough.

It might not be the most exciting part of the mobile connectivity segment, but spectrum is one of the most critical. The assets could potentially define the success of a telco in the future 5G world, and numerous executives have already bemoaned the process of securing the frequencies. Some are complaining of the scarcity, and others of the price. Spectrum is central to 5G plans, and it’s not cheap.

This current predicament has been predicted however. Back in January, RBC Capital Markets suggested Vodafone might be in a precarious position due to years of restructuring, M&A, as well as exposure in up-coming spectrum auctions.

“Its underlying markets remain ‘challenging’ and it has very little financial headroom despite synergies and cost cutting,” the investor note stated. “Vodafone has options with its towers but faces a threat from 5G spectrum. The dividend is unsustainable even before we consider a macro downturn.”

RBC estimated securing the relevant licences could cost Vodafone between €4.5 billion and €12 billion, and even suggested investors should sell Vodafone shares ahead of a potential dip.

These are of course rumours for the moment, though there is enough support to justify the dip in share price. Only tomorrow’s results will tell.

Vodafone Shareprice

Europe wants another look at Telia’s move into broadcasting

Swedish telecoms group Telia wants to buy Bonnier Broadcasting but the European Commission reckons that might be bad for telly in Sweden and Finland.

Last summer Telia announced it was getting its cheque book out once more to buy Swedish company Bonnier Broadcasting, which runs TV channels in Sweden and Finland. At the time this seemed like a classic multiplay move, in which operators get into content in order to offer more complete communications bundles to their customers.

This sort of thing has taken place all over Europe for years, but the European Commission’s current mood seems to be hostile to such moves. “The in-depth investigation we are opening today aims to ensure that Telia’s proposed acquisition of Bonnier Broadcasting will not lead to higher prices for or less choice of TV channels for consumers in Finland and Sweden,” said Commissioner Margrethe Vestager.

The niggle is that Telia already licenses TV channels from broadcasters to put into bundles. “The proposed acquisition of Bonnier Broadcasting by Telia Company would create a vertically integrated player in the audio-visual industry in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden,” said the EC press release.

This could mean that Telia won’t let its telco competitors license Bonnier stuff, won’t let them advertise against Bonnier stuff and could even deny access to streaming applications to customers of its competitors. Those are all reasonable concerns but surely they apply to most M&A. Furthermore you’d think anti-competitive behaviour by a telco would be a matter for national regulators.

Telia has responded by saying it figured this would happen. In a press release headlined ‘Investigation into acquisition of Bonnier Broadcasting moves into phase 2 in line with expectations’, Telia indicated it had been in the loo-p with the EC’s concerns from the start and will use this phase to put its concerns to rest. It will presumably promise to be really, really nice to its competitors if the EC let it have this one tiny little acquisition.

“A phase 2 investigation into the acquisition of Bonnier Broadcasting is fully in line with our expectations and we now look forward to continuing the constructive dialogue with the European Commission,” said Jonas Bengtsson, General Counsel at Telia. We’re confident that any concerns following the in-depth investigation will be resolved.”

BT reports flat full year numbers but feels bullish about fibre

UK telecoms group BT revealed flat revenue growth on its full year 2018 report, but its new CEO said all the right things about investment.

Revenues were down a percent, but earnings per share were still up 6 percent. Of the business units only the biggest – consumer – showed any growth, with all the B2B units showing small declines. BT expects the 2019 financial year to deliver more of the same, because reasons. It said it has raised its capex guidance to £3.8 billion, but it ended up spending almost £4 billion in the 2018 financial year despite guiding £3.7 billion a year ago.

BT FY 2018 table

“BT delivered solid results for the year, in line with our guidance, with adjusted profit growth in Consumer and Global Services offset by declines in Enterprise and Openreach,” said new Chief Exec Philip Jansen.

“We need to invest to improve our customer propositions and competitiveness. We need to invest to stay ahead in our fixed, mobile and core networks, and we need to invest to overhaul our business to ensure that we are using the latest systems and technology to improve our efficiency and become more agile.

“Our aim is to deliver the best converged network and be the leader in fixed ultrafast and mobile 5G networks. We are increasingly confident in the environment for investment in the UK. We have already announced the first 16 UK cities for 5G investment.

“Today we are announcing an increased target to pass 4m premises with ultrafast FTTP technology by 2020/21, up from 3m, and an ambition to pass 15 million premises by the mid-2020s, up from 10 million, if the conditions are right, especially the regulatory and policy enablers.”

Those infrastructure ambitions are laudable, and were echoed by Openreach CEO Clive Selley, but don’t seem to tally with previous statements on the matter. A year ago Selley said “This year we’ll double our FTTP footprint and by 2020, we will have built it to 3 million homes across the UK. We want to reach 10m premises by the mid-2020s, and believe we can ultimately fully-fibre the majority of the UK under the right conditions.”

So the mid-2020s bit is fine but the 4m promise now has a revised deadline of April 2021, a year and a quarter later than the previous 3m promise. Now we might be missing something here but rather than increasing the target, all BT/Openreach seems to have done is insert another milestone a bit further down the line, which feels a bit deceptive.

“In cut throat market like the UK, there are few opportunities to grow,” said telecoms analyst Paolo Pescatore. “Moves to accelerate plans for its fibre broadband rollout, 5G and cross selling existing services can help increase the group’s bottom line but also require significant investment. The lack of any significant shift in strategy is unsurprising as it’s still early days for Philip Jansen.”

BT is hardly alone in hedging any investment pledge, however vague, with the caveat that it all depends on the regulatory environment. At least it has stopped openly begging for public money, for now. But the barely adjusted capex outlook implies even that pledge is trivial and Jansen might need to test his own investors’ patience with a more aggressive approach once he’s fully up to speed.